Latest on the Loch Ness Monster... (1 Viewer)

Max Leung · Jul 28, 2003

BBC 'proves' Nessie does not exist

Aw shucks.

Using 600 separate sonar beams and satellite navigation technology to ensure that none of the loch was missed, the team surveyed the waters said to hide Scotland's legendary tourist attraction but found no trace of the monster.

Well I hope they have better luck looking for Santa Claus at the North Pole, although I suspect that good ol' Santa probably suffered from heart disease after eating too much American fast food.

Click to expand...

Kevin M · Jul 28, 2003

Didn't Doctor Who solve that mystery back in 1974/5?

D. Scott MacDonald · Jul 28, 2003

but found no trace of the monster.

Of course not. Didn't Mr. Burns drain Loch Ness a few years ago and brought Nessie back to Springfield? That's where they should be looking for her.

Click to expand...

Micheal · Jul 28, 2003

Maybe she ducked inside of an underwater cave and it didn't show up on sonar?

Peter Apruzzese · Jul 28, 2003

There's a mechanical one in the Loch, courtesy of the production of the film The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes. When they were filming on location, their mechanical beast (just the head, neck, and humps, IIRC) sank into the Loch, never to be recovered.

So there is one in there, it's just not real

.

andrew markworthy · Jul 28, 2003

It's July - Nessie was on her annual vacation with Big Foot. Sheesh, doesn't the BBC know anything? What are we Brits paying our licence fee for?

Jason_Els · Jul 28, 2003

This is silly. Operation Deep Scan did find just such an anomaly when it went looking for Nessie some years ago doing exactly what the BBC claims to have done. It also does not answer for the possibility of underwater caves or that Nessie may frequently travel from the loch to the ocean and back. All this survey tells us is that there was no monster visible in the loch at the time the scan was performed.

Kevin M · Jul 28, 2003

.....there's no damn Nessie...come on guys haven't we matured just a little since the days of In Search Of?

I mean don't get me wrong, I believe in keeping an open sense of wonder and all that but....

Micheal · Jul 28, 2003

FWIW, I was kidding. That's why I used the "grinning idiot" face. Like so...

Kevin M · Jul 28, 2003

I wasn't talking to anyone particular...well...yeah I was but not you Micheal.

Jason_Els · Jul 28, 2003

Because something is improbable means it must be impossible. I'll be sure to keep that in mind next time I read about cookie cutter sharks, giant squid, gorillas, platypus, vu quongs, Prezwalski's horse, Haast's eagle, moas, and vuoron patra. I'm sure all of these creatures, which were dismissed by scientists at one time or another as fantasies, will all be aghast to know they don't exist.

There are two facts we can count on when investigating the Loch Ness monster. One, is that various people believe they have seen an unknown creature in or around the loch. The other is that no creature has been found.

As has been posted elsewhere, an announcement is soon to be be made regarding the Orang Pendak. This is a bigfoot-like creature reported in Indonesia on the island of Sumatra. Several scientists from Cambridge actually went looking for the thing and gathered footprints and hair samples. From its gait it was determined that the creature walks upright, like humans. From DNA examination of hair samples it was determined that it is an unknown form of primate.

You can read more here in the Manchester Online website.

I am not saying Nessie exists for certain. I am saying that there will always be a question until science can find a way to tell for certain. Right now that method does not exist.

Micheal · Jul 28, 2003

One fact that we can rely on is that the originator of the most famous photo of the Loch Ness Monster (the one that started this whole thing) admitted on his death-bed that the whole thing was a hoax.

Micheal · Jul 28, 2003

Here is part of the article:

The footprint hoax definitely cooled interest in the Loch, at least from the basis of serious study, but it wasn't the most famous hoax that came from Loch Ness. This dubious honor belongs to a photo supposedly taken by a Dr. Robert Kenneth Wilson in 1934.

This photo shows what looks like a sea serpent with a small head on a long neck, and resembling known images of a pre-historic dinosaur known as the plesiosaur.

The photo was examined and was determined to be genuine, not the result of camera trickery, and investigation of the creature in comparison to the wave sizes put the creature's neck to be a couple of feet in length. All well, and good, except that the "creature" in the photo was nothing more than a fake serpent neck attached to the back of a toy submarine.

How was the information about the faking of the photo discovered? One of the people that was involved with the hoax made a death bed confession in 1994 to that effect. And the person who was responsible for the hoax? None other than our friend, Marmaduke Wetherell.

After the debacle of the fake serpent footprint, Wetherell contacted his stepson, Christian Spurling, about creating the fake monster and setting up the hoax. With the help of Spurling, Wetherell's son Ian, and two friends, Colonel Wilson and Maurice Chambers, who was with Dr. Wilson at the famous sighting, the hoax was on.

Why did Wetherell do this? A possible reason could be revenge after the embarrassment he received because of the fake footprint. However, once the photo was published by the Daily Mail, and once the world reacted so strongly to the photo, all involved probably felt it wouldn't be too good an idea to come forward with a confession about what they had done, even if this was the intention9.

Loch Ness researcher Alister Boyd helped to uncover the hoax when he had discovered a story published years before by Ian Wetherell confessing to the hoax, a story that had been originally ignored. Boyd and fellow researcher David Martin contacted the last living representative of the hoax, Spurling, who confessed that he had helped fake the photo10.

In spite of the two uncovered hoaxes, folks still believe in Nessie and every year, people go to considerable lengths to try and find physical evidence of the Loch Ness Monster.

The rest can be found Here

Click to expand...

Cam S · Jul 28, 2003

It wouldn't surprise me AT ALL to find out that there really is a Loch Ness monster in Scotland or an Ogopogo in Kelowna British Columbia. I mean they have found sea creatures that they thought were instinct for millions and millions of years, only to find a living specimen to prove them wrong. Now I highly doubt there will be only one or two incidents like the Coelacanth. I'm just waiting for them to finally discover Ogopogo, Loch Ness, Giant squid, etc etc.

MikeH1 · Jul 28, 2003

I'm just waiting for them to finally discover Ogopogo,

Yep and you'll be in Saskatchewan when they do

Click to expand...

Richard Travale · Jul 28, 2003

Didn't Mr. Burns drain Loch Ness a few years ago and brought Nessie back to Springfield? That's where they should be looking for her

Yes, but WHICH Springfield?

Click to expand...

Kevin-M · Jul 28, 2003

I think it'd be cool if Nessie did actually exist, but it's more than unlikely that it does. The Loch has been so heavily trafficked over the last couple of decades that the fact that large numbers of people, let alone a single person, haven't got some concrete photo/video evidence by now basically rules out it's existance.

Some of the previously mentioned creatures that were thought extinct/mythical but proven to exist are somewhat bad examples. Most of them live in such remote areas that no one discovering them until modern times isn't that unbelievable. It's one thing to discover a creature in an area where humans rarely venture, but it's another to keep looking for something in a place where there are humans 24/7.

I can see the headlines a few years from now - "Large, two-headed man-serpent found living behind local Circle-K."

Max Leung · Jul 29, 2003

Nobody said that it is impossible for Nessie to exist. It's just that nobody has any evidence. As for giant squid, they've been known to exist for at least a century, because the squid were graceful enough to leave giant carcasses on our beaches you know!

You'd think that we'd see Nessie-like creatures washed up on the shores of Loch Ness. Considering how much coastline there is in the world, and how large the oceans are (millions of square miles), it's amazing we've found any giant squid at all. One Nessie washing ashore in the Loch would be equivalent to at least a thousand giant squids washing up all over the world.

Another question: Does Loch Ness actually connect with the ocean through tunnels? Or is this just another fantasy?

MarkHastings · Jul 29, 2003

come on guys haven't we matured just a little since the days of In Search Of?

Mature? Since when does believing that the possibility of a dino-type of sea creature can exist make one immature?

Click to expand...

Steve_Tk · Jul 29, 2003

It's amazing that we have to spend this much time and effort to prove that a giant reptilian monster doesn't live in a lake.

What were these people thinking? They would find this then go in search of Megladon and King Kong?

Home Theater

Entertainment & Streaming Content

Physical Media

Home Theater Equipment and Hardware

Other Diversions

Bargains and Classifieds

Home Theater Forum

Archives

Latest on the Loch Ness Monster... (1 Viewer)

Supporting Actor

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Agent

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more

Similar Threads

Forum statistics